to provide more practical guidance. David Woolwine of Hofstra University has criticized the philosophical underpinnings of the Library Bill of Rights, specifically objecting to the use of utilitarianism and "rights discourse" in defense of the principles. The "moral calculus" of the utilitarian argument that free access of information produces the greatest good for the greatest number can also be used to argue in support of restrictions for the purposes of safety and national security. Rights discourse relies on the assertion of rights with minimal referencing, while neglecting detailed argumentation. Woolwine asserts that utilitarianism and rights discourse need to be replaced by a synthesis of modern and post-modern philosophy to coherently and soundly justify the principles of the Library Bill of Rights. Further reading References ALA Bulletin. Vol. 33, No. 11 (October 15, 1939). Two Hundred Years of Young Adult Library Information Services History, a Chronology Wiegand, S.A. "Reality Bites: The Collision of Rhetoric, Rights, and Reality in the Library Bill of Rights." Library Trends 45, (1), 76-86 (1996). Woolwine, David E. "Libraries and the Balance of Liberty and Security." Library Philosophy and Practice (E-Journal), Libraries at University of Nebraska-Lincoln (2007). American Library Association Freedom of expression in the United States American librarianship and human rights